New Idaho law effectively nullifies future federal gun control

BOISE, March 21, 2014 – Yesterday, Idaho Gov. Butch Otter signed a bill which would effectively nullify future federal gun laws by prohibiting state enforcement of any future federal act relating to personal firearms, a firearm accessories or ammunition.

S1332 passed the house by a vote of 68-0 and the senate by a vote of 34-0.

Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, cheered the governor’s action. “By signing this nullification bill into law, Idaho has joined an elite class of states that are telling the feds to ‘get lost’ — especially when it comes to unconstitutional gun control infringements”

“protect Idaho law enforcement officers from being directed, through federal executive orders, agency orders, statutes, laws, rules, or regulations enacted or promulgated on or after the effective date of this act, to violate their oath of office and Idaho citizens’ rights under Section 11, Article I, of the Constitution of the State of Idaho.”

The legislation continues:

any official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision thereof who knowingly and willfully orders an official, agent or employee of the state of Idaho or a political subdivision of the state to enforce any executive order, agency order, law, rule or regulation of the United States government as provided in subsection (2) of this section upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition shall, on a first violation, be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) which shall be paid into the general fund of the state,

Judge Andrew Napolitano suggested that a single state standing down would make new federal gun laws “nearly impossible to enforce” within that state.

James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” also advised this very tactic. Madison supplied the blueprint for resisting federal power inFederalist 46. He outlined several steps that states can take to effective stop “an unwarrantable measure,” or “even a warrantable measure” of the federal government. Madison called for “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” as a way to successfully thwart federal acts.

S1332 also includes an emergency provision meaning it takes effect immediately upon signature.

Notice the “on or after the effective date of this act” clause, because this differentiates SB1332 from other legislation proposed in states such as Arizona and Missouri to resist all federal infringement of the right to bear arms. These bills would end state compliance with all federal firearms laws. The Idaho bill would apply to future acts.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey considered the legislation a good start. “This is an important first step for Idaho,” he said. “Getting this law passed will ensure that any new plans or executive orders that might be coming our way will not be enforced in Idaho. Then, once this method is established and shown to be effective, legislators can circle back and start doing the same for federal gun control already on the books. SB1332 is an important building block for protecting the 2nd Amendment in Idaho.”

Passage into law represents a giant step forward in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Idaho. As it stands now, state and local law enforcement will cooperate with all future firearms laws.

The bill rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce and federal act or program The anti-commandeering doctrine rests primarily on four Supreme Court cases cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. US serves as the cornerstone.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

Idaho has succeeded where it did not last year, in limiting the feds’ ability to grab guns. While the new law is an important step forward, it should be noted that it is a first step, not a last step. Follow up legislation in 2015 should expand the law to include prohibitions on federal gun control measures already in place today.

ACTION ITEMS

All other other states: take action to get your state on board, and protect the 2nd Amendment HERE.

I commend the Idaho legislatures for putting their state on the front line. They have essentially guaranteed their seat at the table for all future discussions. They ARE now the leader and I believe you will see a host of other states follow their lead very fast. Ashton Jenicek comments about them essentially saying that they are “not wanting to play” are as wrong as can be. In fact what they have said is WE ARE THE KEY PLAYER … and if anyone wants to play they will have to play with us! BRAVO IDAHO!

Idaho has never been taken seriously at the federal level but now it has stepped into a leadership position that other states can look up to. Self reliance and self governing are values of Idaho. My Great – Grandfather homesteaded in this land and would be proud that a shred of these values still exists today. The steady reliqueshment of freedom has got to stop somewhere and Idaho is saying it stops here!

Bills like this make me embarrassed to be born and raised in Idaho. Stating that our beautiful state will simply be non compliant to future federal legislation on the regulation of firearms is simply a bad move, whether you are in favor of this regulation or not. It effectively takes Idaho out of the conversation and says we don’t want to play anymore. I don’t want to belong to a state that separates itself so much that it can’t be taken seriously. For all the great people and ideas I’ve seen in this state, the big wigs in the Capital Building are becoming old and out of touch. There’s a way to protect our Pacific Northwest values without just saying screw it.